Amidst the ever-rising mountain of legal suits filed and police reports lodged, Pakatan Rakyat has now returned to the palace in hopes of finding a way out of Perak’s constitutional crisis.
Ironically however, it was the palace which was the first stumbling block when their appeal to Sultan Azlan Shah for the dissolution of the state assembly on Feb 4 was met with brusque rejection.
To top it off, the ruler had even gone so far as to demand for the resignation of the Pakatan Rakyat government the very next day, to which Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin had “respectfully” rejected.
Now, Nizar faces the possibility of standing before Sultan Azlan Shah yet again and urging the Ruler, for the second time, to dissolve the state assembly.
That is, of course, if he is granted an audience.
Former exco member Nga Kor Ming told pressmen today that Nizar would be carrying more ammunition with him this time, in the form of the three motions approves beneath the tree during an emergency sitting three days ago.
The motions are – a vote of confidence for Nizar as the rightful Mentri Besar instead of his successor from Barisan Nasional, Datuk Dr Zambry Abd Kadir, a request for royal consent for the dissolution of the state assembly, and the adoption of the decision made by Speaker V Sivakumar as chairman of the assembly’s Rights and Privileges Committee to suspend Dr Zambry and his six “unlawful” exco members from the House.
“It is the wish of Perakians that the assembly gets dissolved and power is returned to them to decide on their own government.
“With greatest respect to His Royal Highness, we hope that this is granted,” Nga told reporters at the Perak DAP headquarters.
The big question now is whether the palace will grant an audience to Nizar in the first place for there are ongoing deliberations in the courts as to whether Tuesday’s sitting had been legal.
The Ipoh High Court had even issued an order on the very day of the sitting, restraining Sivakumar from convening any unlawful meetings, purporting it to be state assembly sittings.
Lawyers have confirmed however that the order, served to Sivakumar two days ago, was not “retroactive”, which means that it did not apply to Tuesday’s sitting.
Nga scoffed at the order, saying that it only applied to stopping Sivakumar from convening “unlawful” meetings and there was no mention of “lawful” ones.
“We do not need a court order to tell us that we are not allowed to convene unlawful meetings,” he joked.
As such, added Nga, the three resolutions passed by the House on Tuesday were legal and should be complied by all assemblymen, even those who had not attended the sitting.
Of Perak’s 59 assemblymen, all 28 from Pakatan Rakyat had attended the sitting, including Sivakumar as the Speaker, while none of the Barisan Nasional’s 28 or the three Independents were there.
“The motions passed remain unaffected for there was no court order declaring otherwise.
“We had the quorum of one quarter of the House, we adjourned to a lawful place under the ‘yellow flame tree’ and we have a legal Speaker,” he said.
“With this, I appeal to my dear friend Dr Zambry to call it a day and resign as the Mentri Besar. After all, he no longer commands the majority support of the House,” he said.
Dr Zambry however, has chosen to turn a deaf ear to his opponents and has instead gone about with his Mentri Besar duties.
In a separate function yesterday, a cheerful Dr Zambry told reporters that since his one month in office, Perak had seen a deluge of investments.
He reassured the people that despite the seemingly unhealthy economic and political climate, Perak’s investment portfolio had remained virile.
Dr Zambry has also decided to keep mum on the Opposition’s antics in trying to wrest his Mentri Besar post back.
When reporters attempted to grill him on political matters, the ever-smiling Dr Zambry reiterated that he would not entertain such questions.
He has chosen to put himself and his government at the mercy of the court of law, a place where the Pakatan Rakyat, despite valiant efforts, has, in recent days, lost some of its advantage.
Earlier yesterday however, an attempt to regain some advantage was made when counsels fighting to represent Sivakumar in two suits, filed notices of appeal in Putrajaya and in Ipoh to overrule the High Court decision that the Speaker had to be represented by the state legal adviser.
The suits against Sivakumar are — an application for a declaration from the court by three Independents stating their resignations had been illegal and a declaration that the suspension of Dr Zambry and his six excos had been unlawful and invalid.
No comments:
Post a Comment